Do you believe in Heaven and Hell? (1 Viewer)

[KingSpeed]

And if you do, what happens to a 6 year old boy in Africa who dies of cancer having never been taught about Christianity? Does he go to Hell? And how do you know the answer to that question?

 

[Mediocre Man]

I used to, but the fact Nate keeps getting contracts by the Blazers has mad me doubt that there is a God.


In all seriousness, there are many scriptures that answer this question. An example I can think of is Matthews 19:14 But Jesus said, Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me: for of such is the kingdom of heaven.

Now there are also a lot of scriptures that say you have to be born again, so I think, like all of it, that it is about faith.

Children belong to God. The question is what is the age of accountability

 

[The Sebastian Express]

If I recall my lessons well enough I believe one must be aware of the presence of God and thus have the choice to accept or deny his existence to be condemned to Hell (if they deny/don't accept). The innocent who are unaware (and thus very young children) are accepted into the Kingdom of Heaven.

 

[BrianFromWA]

Heaven and hell? Yes.
But to answer your second question requires a little more. We have no right to establish doctrine on the basis of what we hope may be true. We must draw our answers from what the Bible reveals to be true. And depending on worldview verses can be shaped to back up whatever someone wants. There isn't a clear-cut verse that answers the question. So take this as one man's opinion.

The interpretation of Romans I choose to believe basically says that God is sovereign over the salvation of all.

For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God

. It also reveals that we are born marked by original sin, and thus we cannot claim that infants are born in a state of innocence. Any biblical answer to the question of infant salvation must start from the understanding that infants are born with a sin nature.

Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me...The wicked are estranged from the womb; they go astray from birth, speaking lies.

I doubt anyone who's seen a toddler can say that they have no sin in them.

To your other points (kid in Africa who's never heard of Christ), Romans 1 states that no one has an excuse for not worshipping the Creator, whether they've seen a missionary or had a bible shipped in or not.

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. Claiming to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things.

Just because he's 6 years old doesn't mean he's "clean." In addition to the quotes of infants above, there's this:

As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one

Psalms states that God knew what the plan for us was before we were even born...how we were going to live, how we were going to die.

Your eyes saw my unformed substance; in your book were written, every one of them, the days that were formed for me, when as yet there was none of them.

In Corinthians it talks about the judgment of all, not just people older than a certain age:

For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each one may receive what is due for what he has done in the body, whether good or evil. Therefore, knowing the fear of the Lord, we persuade others. But what we are is known to God, and I hope it is known also to your conscience.

God is ultimately in control of our salvation and our lives, as evidenced by his decisions of twin brothers.

though they were not yet born and had done nothing either good or bad—in order that God’s purpose of election might continue, not because of works but because of him who calls—she was told, “The older will serve the younger." As it is written (Ed. in Micah 1), “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.”

So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills. You will say to me then, “Why does he still find fault? For who can resist his will?” But who are you, O man, to answer back to God? Will what is molded say to its molder, “Why have you made me like this?” Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use? What if God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction,in order to make known the riches of his glory for vessels of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory—even us whom he has called, not from the Jews only but also from the Gentiles?

The main point for me, though, is that everyone...unborn fetuses, infants, toddlers, kids in Africa, adults, etc...are by their nature and actions condemned to be eternally separated from God. Only by his grace, which is indiscernible to us and a mystery to all who attempt to understand God's way, can someone be saved into Heaven and eternal communion with him. The Bible speaks multiple times of people with their last breath acknowledging Christ and being saved into Paradise. If, heaven forbid, my little girl died today, I would know that as a not-even-2-y/o she has sinned and deserves eternal separation from God, but that Jesus' promise that He has saved all the Father gave to him would comfort me.

For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life through Christ Jesus our Lord.

Also, I would also read and reflect about David, who lost a son b/c of his own sin and punishment, but whose son went to Heaven:

But now he is dead; why should I fast? Can I bring him back again? I shall go to him, but he shall not return to me.

There's also B.B. Warfield's quote:

"If all that die in infancy are saved, it can only be through the almighty operation of Holy Spirit, who works when, and where, and how He pleases, through whose ineffable grace the Father gathers these little ones to the home He has prepared for them."

 

[crowTrobot]

yes i didn't think RJD singing for Black Sabbath would work but it was awesome

 

[crowTrobot]

The question is what is the age of accountability

accountability for what? i am no more capable of believing in the biblical god than a fetus is.

 

[crowTrobot]

Romans 1 states that no one has an excuse for not worshipping the Creator, whether they've seen a missionary or had a bible shipped in or not.

apparently the apostle paul was every bit as prejudiced, arrogant, and egotistical as christian fundamentalists are today

 

[BrianFromWA]

I find it rich that you describe someone in those terms while making that assumption based off a fragment of a verse.

Pray tell, what is a "fundamentalist" to you? How can you describe someone as "egotistical" who claims that they are nothing without God's grace?

 

[BrianFromWA]

accountability for what? i am no more capable of believing in the biblical god than a fetus is.

You sell yourself short. You choose every day what you want to believe.

 

[crowTrobot]

I find it rich that you describe someone in those terms while making that assumption based off a fragment of a verse.

that wasn't directed at you specifically, although if you think my interpretation of the evidence isn't a great excuse for me to not believe in your god you're certainly overrating your abilitiy to think rationally about this subject.

Pray tell, what is a "fundamentalist" to you?

someone who takes as much of the bible as they can possible get away with literally

How can you describe someone as "egotistical" who claims that they are nothing without God's grace?

it's overtly egocentric to think a universal creator if one exists would give a rats ass whether you accept him or not.

 

[crowTrobot]

You sell yourself short. You choose every day what you want to believe.

i'm certainly free to brainwash myself to ignore evidence if it were possible for me to do that. unfortunately for my eternal soul i wasn't born with that capability.

 

[BrianFromWA]

that wasn't directed at you specifically, although if you think my interpretation of the evidence isn't a great excuse for me to not believe in your god you're certainly overrating your abilitiy to think rationally about this subject.

I wasn't taking it specifically, I was attributing what you said to Paul. And I'd submit that if you'd comprehended (I'd say "read", but crandc showed many times on here that no matter how much you want to say you've read the bible "cover to cover" you can make horribly inaccurate conclusions) more than a couple of verses of what Paul wrote (13-14 books/epistles of the Bible) you'd have a hard time attributing "arrogant, prejudiced and egotistical" to him. That's all.

someone who takes as much of the bible as they can possible get away with literally

And you think that there's another way to do so, taught by scripture? Or that only certain things should be taken literally?

it's overtly egocentric to think a universal creator if one exists would give a rats ass whether you accept him or not.

That's a pretty big fallacy. Using your assumption of "if one exists," He's told us that that's what he requires. Your bias on the issue doesn't change the tenets of the religion.

 

[PapaG]

I don't believe in either, and I don't disbelieve in either.

 

[crowTrobot]

I wasn't taking it specifically, I was attributing what you said to Paul. And I'd submit that if you'd comprehended (I'd say "read", but crandc showed many times on here that no matter how much you want to say you've read the bible "cover to cover" you can make horribly inaccurate conclusions) more than a couple of verses of what Paul wrote (13-14 books/epistles of the Bible) you'd have a hard time attributing "arrogant, prejudiced and egotistical" to him. That's all.

i have, and from a non-believer's standpoint paul comes off as extremely arrogant - no different than modern christians who say people don't believe what they do because of 'hardened hearts' (etc). that's a conversation ender. like saying any other belief but your own can't possibly be genuine. i wouldn't say that to you about your view of evolution/age of the earth. i think it's ludicrous, but i wouldn't accuse you of not genuinely feeling justified in it.

the point i'm making is genuine belief (or lack of belief) is by definition compelled. it is not a matter of free will choice. god assigning culpability to the belief of an adult makes no more sense than god assigning culpability to babies.

And you think that there's another way to do so, taught by scripture? Or that only certain things should be taken literally?

what i think isn't relevant. i was just defining what i consider a fundamentalist. there are certainly a lot christians who interpret the bible selectively to better fit modern common sense. for example i think original sin is pretty much a minority view now.

That's a pretty big fallacy. Using your assumption of "if one exists," He's told us that that's what he requires. Your bias on the issue doesn't change the tenets of the religion.

it requires a high level of egocentricity just to accept that the religion could possible be true.

 

[PapaG]

it requires a high level of egocentricity just to accept that the religion could possible be true.

Does it? By definition, it also required a high level of egocentricity to accept that the religion is definitely not true as well, at least in terms of logic.

The religion of atheism is just as faith-based as any other religion.

 

[crowTrobot]

Does it? By definition, it also required a high level of egocentricity to accept that the religion is definitely not true as well, at least in terms of logic.

it requires a tremendous leap of egocentrism (or anthropocentrism if you want) to believe the point of the universe is to be a testing ground for humans.

The religion of atheism is just as faith-based as any other religion.

lack of belief in something doesn't require faith. and you would probably define me as an agnostic anyway.

 

[ABM]

I believe in Heaven and Hell. I believe in the Holy Bible. I believe that the 6-year old boy in Africa was saved by God's Grace and has gone to Heaven.

 

[Mediocre Man]

I don't believe in either, and I don't disbelieve in either.

Agnostic's are fascinating to me. Strictly just an observational post.

 

[ABM]

Agnostic's are fascinating to me. Strictly just an observational post.

Which reminds me of......the definition of an agnostic, dyslexic, insomniac is someone who lays awake at night...wondering if there really is a dog.

 

[PapaG]

Agnostic's are fascinating to me. Strictly just an observational post.

I feel the same way about much of evolutionary theory, the myth called the Big Bang, and the 'evolution' of organic and animated life from inorganic and inanimate sources.

 

[PapaG]

Which reminds me of......the definition of an agnostic, dyslexic, insomniac is someone who lays awake at night...wondering if there really is a dog.

Point of clarity ... the agnostics that I know, including myself, my wife, and my brother, don't ever wonder about the existence, or inexistence, of God, outside of what can be proven. I certainly have no issue with those who believe, or disbelieve, based on faith and assumption, though.

 

[Sinobas]

The bible does not say anything about an "age of accountability". So Christians don't really have a biblical basis to assume that aborted babies are not going to hell. Besides, is it any more 'just' to send an aborted baby to hell, than a 33 year old that has never heard?

And if those who don't hear are automatically saved, WHY THE HELL SEND MISSIONARIES.

 

[mook]

I believe in Heaven and Hell. I believe in the Holy Bible. I believe that the 6-year old boy in Africa was saved by God's Grace and has gone to Heaven.

that's what I don't get. If you assume:
1. Hell really, really sucks forever
2. Innocents who have no exposure to religion won't go there if they die
3. Most people will grow up to not accept your religion, and so will rot in hell for eternity

It seems like the logical thing to do is kill as many babies as possible. Odds are you will prevent a lot of people from eternal damnation. And while you yourself might be damned forever, it's a pretty selfless act to save so many others.

 

[Denny Crane]

yes i didn't think RJD singing for Black Sabbath would work but it was awesome

[video=youtube;-og87crqsCE]

I was thinking the same thing.

YES, I do believe in this heaven and hell.

 

[ABM]

It seems like the logical thing to do is kill as many babies as possible. Odds are you will prevent a lot of people from eternal damnation. And while you yourself might be damned forever, it's a pretty selfless act to save so many others.

Go also gave humans brains...and the ability to reason. What you are essentially proposing is ludicrous........and you know it. <nodding head>

 

[crowTrobot]

I feel the same way about much of evolutionary theory, the myth called the Big Bang, and the 'evolution' of organic and animated life from inorganic and inanimate sources.

speciation by common descent involving some form of environmental genetic selection, and that a hot big bang preceded our expanding universe are as close to scientific fact as anything can be. perhaps you are actually just referring to being agnostic about the implications people tend to draw from those things concerning atheism/theism?

abiogenesis isn't quite settled, so you can intellectually get away with being agnostic about that (for now).

 

[crowTrobot]

Go also gave humans brains...and the ability to reason. What you are essentially proposing is ludicrous........and you know it. <nodding head>

why is it ludicrous? the bible directly states the majority of people will reject god, so if babies are automatically saved killing everyone as babies is absolutely doing them a huge favor just as a matter of statistics.

another example of christians not really taking the implications of their beliefs seriously.

 

[crowTrobot]

I was thinking the same thing.

YES, I do believe in this heaven and hell.

yup and gone too soon

 

[PapaG]

speciation by common descent involving some form of environmental genetic selection, and that a hot big bang preceded our expanding universe are as close to scientific fact as anything can be. perhaps you are actually just referring to being agnostic about the implications people tend to draw from those things concerning atheism/theism?

abiogenesis isn't quite settled, so you can intellectually get away with being agnostic about that (for now).

Well, as close to fact other than neither have ever been replicated and/or repeated in a controlled scientific setting.

Unless, of course, you've witnessed a secondary Big Bang that gave us all of our natural elements, and all elements found in the universe. I must have missed that one in the latest issue of Nature.

People like you are as close-minded as the hardcore creationists. The pure randonmess of speciation, and the lack of literally millions of failed new species in the fossil record, is more of an endorsement of intelligent design than it is is some silly theory that some species adapt and change into new species, while others are unchanged for literally millions of years. There are even competing theories of speciation, two of them being a gradual process verus the gentetic leap, yet you're convinced that speciation is as close to fact as you get in science?

I sure hope you don't teach science, because you seem to be terrible at understanding it, and how to prove a scientific law.

 

[3RA1N1AC]

would heaven really be heaven with a bunch of kids running all the fuck around? i guess they probably just have gated communities for the adults, and neverending preschool teachers